Digital White Papers


publication of the International Legal Technology Association

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 4 of 90

5 WWW.ILTANET.ORG | ILTA WHITE PAPER LITIGATION AND PRACTICE SUPPORT ILTA's 2017 Litigation and Practice Support Technology Survey Results Keeping up with the latest tools and trends in the litigation and practice support industry can be overwhelming. This survey aims to provide you with insight on what your peers and other organizations are doing to meet litigation demands. From hot topics in training/education, industry- recognized certifications, to in-house discovery services, this survey includes valuable metrics to benefit you and your team. These are just a few examples of the information provided in this survey. Read on for much more. » In the rapidly evolving world of litigation and practice support, few things remain constant. The survey shows that participating organizations are continuing to use the hourly model as the primary pricing method. Productions, processing and presentation/trial support remain the most frequent services performed in-house. Whereas, frequent services outsourced are computer forensics, data collection, and scanning. » Organizations are continuing to improve efficiencies due to time and budget constraints which is reflected by the increased reported use of advanced analytics. Email threading, near duplicate identification, and concept searching are the top contenders. We are also seeing a slight uptick in users leveraging machine learning technology for early case assessment and to expedite and/ or prioritize review. ILTA ILTA's 2017 Litigation and Practice Support Technology Survey Results THANK YOU! We understand the pressure our members are under, and it marvels us that our respondents so willingly offer their time to ILTA surveys. This is our third annual Litigation and Practice Support Technology survey — an offshoot from our annual Technology Survey. We give a special salute to our survey project team: Chris Haley of Troutman Sanders; Cindy MacBean, of Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald; Matthew Clark, of Hogan Lovells; and Michael Quartararo of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP. Thanks to all who contributed their time and energy, both behind the scenes and among our membership. 8 WWW.ILTANET.ORG | ILTA WHITE PAPER LITIGATION AND PRACTICE SUPPORT ILTA's 2016 Litigation and Practice Support Technology Survey Results By what name is your litigation/practice support department, group, team or employee known or identified? What department does litigation/practice support group report to at your organization? Does your firm have a litigation/practice support department, group, team or employee? If you have more than one office, is your litigation/practice support technology and staff centralized or decentralized? Yes, 75% No 7% Considered part of IT 17% Other 2% Decentralized 11% Fully centralized 39% Mostly or partially centralized 19% Not applicable 30% 2% 4% 15% 13% 27% 41% 1% 2% 15% 16% 27% 40% 0% 25% 50% Electronic Discovery Practice Group Not Anwered Other Executive Director (or other firm admin officer) Litigation Practice Group CIO/Information Technology 2016 2015 7% 4% 6% 7% 11% 18% 51% 2% 2% 3% 4% 13% 24% 52% 0% 20% 40% 60% Not Anwered Legal Technology Litigation Technology Electronic Discovery Practice Support Other Litigation Support 2016 2015 view last year's survey results »

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Digital White Papers - LPS18